Chapter XII: Part 12

After the battle with Pôros, Boukephalas died, not immediately, but some time afterwards, from wounds which he received in the engagement. This is the account which most historians give, but Onesikritos says that he died of old age and overwork, for he had reached his thirtieth year.[384] Alexander deeply regretted his loss, taking it as much to heart as if it had been that of a faithful friend and companion. He founded a city in his honour on the banks of the Hydaspês, and named it Boukephalia. It is also recorded that when he lost a pet dog called Peritas, which he had brought up, and of which he was very fond, he founded a city and called it by the name of this dog. Sôtiôn tells us that he had heard this from Potamôn of Lesbos.

_Chapter LXII.—The army refuses to advance to the Ganges—Alexander, preparing to retreat, erects altars which were afterwards held in veneration by the Praisian kings—The opinion of Androkottos_

The battle with Pôros depressed the spirits of the Macedonians, and made them very unwilling to advance farther into India. For as it was with the utmost difficulty they had beaten him when the army he led amounted only to 20,000 infantry and 2000 cavalry, they now most resolutely opposed Alexander when he insisted that they should cross the Ganges.[385] This river, they heard, had a breadth of two-and-thirty stadia, and a depth of 100 fathoms, while its farther banks were covered all over with armed men, horses, and elephants. For the kings of the Gandaritai and the Praisiai[386] were reported to be waiting for him with an army of 80,000 horse, 200,000 foot, 8000 war chariots, and 6000 fighting elephants. Nor was this any exaggeration, for not long afterwards Androkottos,[387] who had by that time mounted the throne, presented Seleukos with 500 elephants, and overran and subdued the whole of India with an army of 600,000 men. Alexander at first in vexation and rage withdrew to his tent, and shutting himself up lay there feeling no gratitude towards those who had thwarted his purpose of crossing the Ganges; but regarding a retreat as tantamount to a confession of defeat. But being swayed by the persuasions of his friends, and the entreaties of his soldiers who stood weeping and lamenting at the door of his tent, he at last relented, and prepared to retreat. He first, however, contrived many unfair devices to exalt his fame among the natives, as, for instance, causing arms for men and stalls and bridles for horses to be made much beyond the usual size, and these he left scattered about. He also erected altars for the gods which the kings of the Praisiai even to the present day hold in veneration, crossing the river to offer sacrifices upon them in the Hellenic fashion.[388] Androkottos himself, who was then but a youth, saw Alexander himself, and afterwards used to declare that Alexander could easily have taken possession of the whole country since the king was hated and despised by his subjects for the wickedness of his disposition and the meanness of his origin.[389]

_Chapter LXIII.—Alexander starts on a voyage down stream, reducing tribes by the way—He is dangerously wounded in the capital of the Malloi—Extraction of the arrow from his wound—His recovery_

After marching thence Alexander, who wished to see the outer ocean, ordered many rafts and vessels managed with oars to be built, and he then fell down the rivers in a leisurely manner. But the voyage was neither an idle one nor unattended with warlike operations, for at times he disembarked, and attacking the cities which adjoined the banks succeeded in subduing them all. But he very nearly lost his life when he was amongst the people called the Malloi, who were said to be the most warlike of all the Indians. For in besieging their city, after he had driven the defenders from the walls by volleys of missiles, he was the first man to ascend a scaling ladder and reach the summit of the wall.[390] Just then the ladder broke, so that he was left almost alone, and as the barbarians who were standing at the foot of the wall inside shot at him from below, he was repeatedly hit with their missiles. He therefore poised himself and leaped down into the midst of his enemies, alighting by good chance on his feet. The flashing of his arms as he brandished them made the barbarians think that lightning or some supernatural splendour played round his person, and they therefore drew back and dispersed. But when they saw that he was attended by two followers only, some of them attacked him at close-quarters with swords and spears, while one man, who stood a little farther off, shot an arrow from his bow at full bent, and with such force that it pierced through his corselet and lodged itself in the bones of his breast.[391] As he staggered under the blow and sank upon his knees, the barbarian ran up with his drawn scimitar to despatch him. Peukestas and Limnaios[392] placed themselves before Alexander to protect him; both of them were wounded, one of them mortally; but Peukestas, who survived, continued to make some resistance, while the king slew the Indian with his own hand. Alexander was wounded in many places; and at last received a blow on his neck from a club, which forced him to lean for support against the wall with his face turned towards the enemy. The Macedonians, who by this time had come up, crowded round him, and snatching him up, now insensible to all around him, carried him off to his tent. A rumour immediately ran through the camp that he was dead, and his attendants having with great difficulty sawed through the arrow, which had a wooden shaft, were thus able after much trouble to take off his corselet. They had next to extract the barbed head of the arrow which was firmly fixed in one of his ribs. This arrow-head is said to have measured three fingers’ breadths in width and four in length. Accordingly, when it was pulled out, he swooned away and was brought very near the gates of death, but he at length revived. When he was out of danger, but still very weak, having for a long time to follow the mode of life most conducive to the restoration of his health, he heard a disturbance outside his tent, and learning that the Macedonians were longing to see him he put on his cloak and went out to them. After sacrificing to the gods, he again moved forward and subdued a great extent of country and many considerable cities that lay on his route.

_Chapter LXIV.—Alexander’s interview with the Indian gymnosophists_

He captured ten of the gymnosophists who had been principally concerned in persuading Sabbas[393] to revolt, and had done much harm otherwise to the Macedonians. These men are thought to be great adepts in the art of returning brief and pithy answers, and Alexander proposed for their solution some hard questions, declaring that he would put to death first the one who did not answer correctly and then the others in order.[394]

He demanded of the first “Which he took to be the more numerous, the living or the dead?” He answered, “The living, for the dead are not.”

The second was asked, “Which breeds the largest animals, the sea or the land?” He answered, “The land, for the sea is only a part of it.”

The third was asked, “Which is the cleverest of beasts?” He answered, “That with which man is not yet acquainted.”

The fourth was asked, “For what reason he induced Sabbas to revolt?” He answered, “Because I wished him to live with honour or die with honour.”

The fifth was asked, “Which he thought existed first, the day or the night?” He answered, “The day was first by one day.” As the king appeared surprised at this solution, he added, “Impossible questions require impossible answers.”

Alexander then turning to the sixth asked him “How a man could best make himself beloved?” He answered, “If a man being possessed of great power did not make himself to be feared.”

Of the remaining three, one being asked “How a man could become a god?” replied, “By doing that which is impossible for a man to do.”

The next being asked, “Which of the two was stronger, life or death?” he replied, “Life, because it bears so many evils.”

The last being asked, “How long it was honourable for a man to live?” answered, “As long as he does not think it better to die than to live.”

Upon this Alexander, turning to the judge, requested him to give his decision. He said they had answered each one worse than the other. “Since such is your judgment,” Alexander then said, “you shall be yourself the first to be put to death.” “Not so,” said he, “O king, unless you are false to your word, for you said that he who gave the worst answer should be the first to die.”

_Chapter LXV.—Onesikritos confers with the Indian gymnosophists Kalanos and Dandamis—Kalanos visits Alexander and shows him a symbol of his empire_

The king then gave them presents and dismissed them to their homes. He also sent Onesikritos to the most renowned of these sages, who lived by themselves in tranquil seclusion, to request that they would come to him.[395] This Onesikritos was a philosopher who belonged to the school of Diogenês the Cynic. He tells us that one of these men called Kalanos ordered him with the most overbearing insolence and rudeness to take off his clothes, and listen naked to his discourse—otherwise he would not enter into conversation with him even if he came from Zeus himself. Dandamis, however, was of a milder temper, and when he had been told about Sôkrates, Pythagoras and Diogenês, he said they appeared to him to have been men of genius, but from an excessive deference to the laws had subjected their lives too much to their requirements. But other writers tell us that he said nothing more than this, “For what purpose has Alexander come all the way hither?” Taxilês, however, persuaded Kalanos to visit Alexander. His real name was Sphinês, but as he saluted those whom he met with “Kale,” which is the Indian equivalent of “Chairein” (that is, “All hail”), he was called by the Greeks Kalanos. This philosopher, we are told, showed Alexander a symbol of his empire. He threw down on the ground a dry and shrivelled hide and planted his foot on the edge of it. But when it was trodden down in one place, it started up everywhere else. He then walked all round it and showed that the same thing took place wherever he trod, until at length he stepped into the middle, and by doing so made it all lie flat. This symbol was intended to show Alexander that he should control his empire from its centre, and not wander away to its distant extremities.

_Chapter LXVI.—Alexander visits the island Skilloustis, and sailing thence explores the sea—Sufferings of his army on the march homeward, and extent of its losses—Relief sent by the satraps_

Alexander’s voyage down the rivers to the sea occupied seven months. On reaching the ocean he sailed to an island which he himself has called Skilloustis, but which is generally known as Psiltoukis.[396] On landing there he sacrificed to the gods, exploring afterwards the nature of the sea and the coast as far as he could penetrate. This done, he turned back, after praying to the gods that no man might ever overpass the limits which his expedition had reached. He ordered his fleet to sail along the coast, keeping India on the right hand; and he appointed Nearchos to the chief command, with Onesikritos as the master pilot. He himself, returning by land with the army, marched through the country of the Oreitai, where he was reduced to the sorest straits from the scarcity of provisions, and lost such numbers of men that he hardly brought back from India the fourth part of his military force, though he entered it with 120,000 foot and 15,000 horse. Many perished from malignant distempers, wretched food, and scorching heat, but most from sheer hunger, for their march lay through an uncultivated region, inhabited only by some miserable savages, the owners of a small and inferior breed of sheep, accustomed to feed on sea-fish, which gave to their flesh a rank and disagreeable flavour.[397] With great difficulty, therefore, he traversed this desert region in sixty days, and reached Gedrôsia, where all the men were at once supplied with abundance of provisions, furnished by the satraps and kings of the nearest provinces.

_Chapter LXVII.—Alexander and the army indulge in wild revelry on emerging from the desert_

After he had given his forces some time to recruit, he led them in a joyous revel for seven days through Karmania. He himself sat at table with his companions mounted on a lofty oblong platform drawn by eight horses, and in that conspicuous position feasted continually both by day and by night. This carriage was followed by numberless others, some with purple hangings and embroidered canopies, and others screened with over-arching green boughs always fresh gathered, conveying the rest of Alexander’s friends and officers crowned with garlands and drinking wine. There was not a helmet, a shield, or a pike to be seen, but all along the road the soldiers were dipping cups, horns, and earthen vessels into great jars and flagons of wine, and drinking one another’s healths, some as they went marching forward, and others as they sat by the way. Wherever they passed might be heard the music of the pipe and the flute and the voices of women singing and dancing and making merry. During this disorderly and dissolute march the soldiers after their cups indulged in ribald jests, as if the god Dionysos himself were present among them and accompanying their joyous procession.[398] Alexander, on reaching the capital of Gedrôsia, again halted to refresh his army, and entertained it with feasting and revelry.

JUSTIN

HISTORIAE PHILIPPICAE OF JUSTINUS

TWELFTH BOOK

_Chapter VII.—Alexander visits Nysa and Mount Merus—Receives the submission of Queen Cleophis and captures the Rock (Aornos)_

... After this he advanced towards India that he might make the ocean and the remotest East the limits of his empire. In order that the decorations of his army might be in keeping with this grandeur, he overlaid the trappings of the horses and the arms of his soldiers with silver. He then called the army his argyraspids, because the shields they carried were inwrought with silver. When he had reached the city of Nysa, and found that the inhabitants offered no resistance, he ordered their lives to be spared, from a sentiment of reverence towards Father Bacchus, by whom the city had been founded; at the same time congratulating himself that he had not only undertaken a military expedition like that god, but had even followed his very footsteps. He then led his army to view the sacred mountain, which the genial climate had mantled over with vine and ivy, just as if husbandmen had with industrious hands laboured to make it the perfection of beauty. Now the army on reaching the mountain, in a sudden access of devout emotion, began to howl in honour of the god, and to the amazement of the king ran unmolested all about the place, so that he perceived that by sparing the citizens he had not so much served their interests as those of his own army. Thence he marched to the Daedali mountains[399] and the dominions of Queen Cleophis,[400] who, after surrendering her kingdom, purchased its restoration by permitting the conqueror to share her bed, thus gaining by her fascinations what she had not gained by her valour. The offspring of this intercourse was a son, whom she called Alexander, the same who afterwards reigned as an Indian king. Queen Cleophis, because she had prostituted her chastity, was thereafter called by the Indians _the royal harlot_. When Alexander after traversing India had come to a rock of a wonderful size and ruggedness, unto which many of the people had fled for refuge,[401] he came to know that Hercules had been prevented from capturing that very rock by an earthquake. Being seized, therefore, with an ambitious desire of surpassing the deeds of Hercules, he made himself master of the rock with infinite toil and danger, and then received the submission of all the tribes in that part of the country.

_Chapter VIII.—Alexander conquers Porus—Builds Nicaea and Boucephala, and reduces the Adrestae, Gesteani, Praesidae, and Gangaridae—Advances to the Cuphites (Beäs), beyond which the army refuses to follow him—He agrees to return, and leaves memorials of his progress_

One of the Indian kings called Porus, a man remarkable alike for his personal strength and noble courage, on hearing the report about Alexander, began to prepare war against his coming. Accordingly, when hostilities broke out, he ordered his army to attack the Macedonians, from whom he demanded their king, as if he was his private enemy. Alexander lost no time in joining battle, but his horse being wounded at the first charge, he fell headlong to the ground, and was saved by his attendants who hastened up to his assistance. Porus again, when fainting from the number of his wounds, was taken prisoner. His defeat he took so much to heart that when he had received quarter from the victor, he neither wished to take food nor would allow his wounds to be attended to, and indeed could scarcely be induced to wish for life. Alexander, out of respect for his valour, restored him in safety to his sovereignty. There he built two cities, one which he called Nicaea, and the other Boucephala, after the name of his horse. Moving thence he conquered the Adrestae, the Gesteani, the Praesidae, and the Gangaridae,[402] after defeating their armies with great slaughter. When he reached the Cuphites,[403] where the enemy awaited him with 200,000 cavalry, his soldiers, worn out not less by the number of their victories than by their incessant toils, all besought him with tears to bring at last the war to a close—besought him to have some remembrance of his native country and the duty of returning to it—to have some consideration for the years of his soldiers, to whom scarcely so much of life now remained as would suffice them for returning home. Some pointed to their hoary hair, others to their wounds, others to their bodies withered with age or seamed with scars. None, they said, except themselves had brooked a continuous service under two kings, Philip and Alexander; and now at last they entreated he would send them home where their bodies, wasted as they were to skeletons, might be buried in the tombs of their fathers, seeing it was from no want of will they failed to second his wishes, but from the incapacity of age. If, however, he would not spare his soldiers, he should at all events spare himself, and not wear out his good fortune by subjecting it to too severe a strain. Alexander was moved by these well-grounded entreaties, and, as if he had now reached the goal of victory, ordered a camp to be made of an unusual size and splendour, in order that the work, while calculated to terrify the enemy by its vastness, might be left to render himself an object of admiration to future ages. Never did the soldiers apply themselves with such alacrity to any work as they did to this; and when it was finished they retraced their way to the parts whence they had come as joyfully as if they were returning from a field of victory.

_Chapter IX.—Alexander sailing down the Panjâb rivers to the ocean, reduces the Hiacensanae, Silei, Ambri, and Sigambri—He is dangerously wounded in attacking one of their strongholds_

From thence Alexander proceeded to the river Acesines[404] and sailed down stream towards the ocean. On his way he received the submission of the Hiacensanae[405] and the Silei[406] whom Hercules had founded. Sailing onward, he came to the Ambri and the Sigambri,[407] who opposed him with an army of 80,000 foot and 60,000 cavalry. Having defeated them, he led his army to their capital. On his observing from the wall, which he was himself the first to mount, that the city was left without defenders, he leaped down without any attendant into the level space at the foot of the wall. Then the enemy, noticing that he was alone, rushed together with loud shouts from all quarters of the city to finish, if possible, the wars that embroiled the world, by one man’s death, and give the many nations he had attacked their revenge. Alexander made an obstinate resistance, and single-handed fought against thousands. It surpasses belief to tell how neither the multitude of his assailants, nor the ceaseless storm of their missiles, nor their savage yells made him quail, and how, alone as he was, he slew and put thousands to flight. When at last he saw that he was being overpowered by numbers, he placed his back against the stem of a tree which grew near the wall, and by this means protected himself till, after he had for a long time stood at bay, his danger became at length known to his friends, who forthwith leaped down from the wall to his assistance. Of these many were slain in the act of defending him, and the issue of the conflict remained doubtful till the walls were thrown down and the whole army came to his rescue. In this battle Alexander was pierced by an arrow under the pap, but even while he was fainting from the loss of blood he sank on his knee, and continued fighting till he slew the man by whom he had been wounded. The operation required for curing his wound threw him into a deadlier swoon than the wound itself had produced.

_Chapter X.—Alexander reaches the city of King Ambigerus (Sambos?)—Ptolemy is there wounded by a poisoned arrow—An antidote to the poison is revealed to Alexander in a dream—He sails down to the mouth of the Indus—Founds Barce—Leaves India and returns to Babylon_

His safety was for a time despaired of, but having at last recovered he sent Polyperchon with part of the army to Babylon. Having himself embarked with a very select company of his friends, he made a voyage along the shores of the ocean. On his reaching the city of King Ambigerus[408] the inhabitants who had heard that he was invulnerable by steel, armed their arrows with poison, which thus inflicted a double wound. With this deadly weapon they killed great numbers of the enemy and repulsed them from the walls. Among many others that were wounded was Ptolemy, but he was rescued from danger just when he appeared to be dying, as soon as he had swallowed a potion prepared from a particular herb which had been revealed to the king in a vision as being an antidote to the poison. The greater part of the army was saved by the same remedy. Alexander having taken the city by storm poured out a libation to the ocean, praying at the same time for a prosperous return to his own country. He was then carried down with the tide in his favour to the mouth of the river Indus. And then like a victor who had triumphantly driven his chariot round the goal, he fixed the frontiers of his empire, having advanced till the deserts at the world’s end barred his farther progress by land, and till seas were no longer navigable. As a monument of his achievements he founded in those parts the city of Barce.[409] He erected altars also, and on departing left one of his friends to be governor of the maritime Indians. As he intended to march homewards by land, and had learned that his route would lie through arid wastes, he ordered wells to be dug at convenient places. Since these were found to yield a copious supply of water he effected his return to Babylon.

FIFTEENTH BOOK

_Chapter IV.—Seleucus Nicator subjugates the Bactrians and enters India—The history of Sandrocottus who was then King of India—Seleucus makes a treaty of peace with him and returns to the West_

... Seleucus Nicator waged many wars in the east after the partition of Alexander’s empire among his generals. He first took Babylon, and then with his forces augmented by victory subjugated the Bactrians. He then passed over into India, which after Alexander’s death, as if the yoke of servitude had been shaken off from its neck, had put his prefects to death. Sandrocottus was the leader who achieved their freedom, but after his victory he forfeited by his tyranny all title to the name of liberator, for he oppressed with servitude the very people whom he had emancipated from foreign thraldom. He was born in humble life, but was prompted to aspire to royalty by an omen significant of an august destiny. For when by his insolent behaviour he had offended Nandrus,[410] and was ordered by that king to be put to death, he sought safety by a speedy flight. When he lay down overcome with fatigue and had fallen into a deep sleep, a lion of enormous size approaching the slumberer licked with its tongue the sweat which oozed profusely from his body, and when he awoke, quietly took its departure. It was this prodigy which first inspired him with the hope of winning the throne, and so having collected a band of robbers, he instigated the Indians to overthrow the existing government. When he was thereafter preparing to attack Alexander’s prefects, a wild elephant of monstrous size approached him, and kneeling submissively like a tame elephant received him on to its back and fought vigorously in front of the army. Sandrocottus having thus won the throne was reigning over India when Seleucus was laying the foundations of his future greatness. Seleucus having made a treaty with him and otherwise settled his affairs in the east, returned home to prosecute the war with Antigonus.

APPENDICES

NOTES A-L_l_

NOTE A.—ALEXANDREIA UNDER KAUKASOS

Alexander had founded this city at the foot of Paropanisos in the spring of 329 B.C., before he crossed into Baktria. For distinction’s sake it was called Alexandreia “under Kaukasos,” or “of the Paropamisadai.” Its position has been a subject much discussed. Sir A. Burnes and Lassen fixed it at Bamiân, but to this there is the objection that Bamiân is situated in the midst of the mountains, and is reached from Kâbul after the main ridge of the Hindu-Kush has been crossed. A position which would suit better for the foundation of a permanent settlement is to be found in the rich and beautiful valley of the Koh-Dâman, which, as its name implies, extends up to the very foot of the great mountain rampart. Towards the northern edge of this valley lies the village of Charikar, whence the three roads that lead into Baktria diverge. In the neighbourhood of this commanding position is a place called Opiân or Houpiân, where vast ruins, first discovered by Masson, indicate the former presence of an important town. A link to connect this place with Alexandreia is supplied by Stephanos of Byzantium, who describes Alexandreia as “a city in Opianê, near India.” From this we may infer that Opiân or Houpiân was the capital of a country of the same name, and that it formed the site of the city which Alexander founded under Kaukasos. This view has been advocated by Dr. H. Wilson and V. de Saint-Martin, and also by General Cunningham, who supports it by a reference to the famous itinerary preserved in Pliny (_N. H._ VI. xvii. 21), from Diognêtos and Baitôn, who recorded the distances of Alexander’s marches. Alexandreia, it is there stated, was 50 miles distant from Ortospanum, and 237 from Peukolatis. As Ortospanum has been on sufficient grounds identified with Kâbul, and Peukolatis with Hashtnagar on the river Landaï, the question arises whether Houpiân is at the required distance from each of these places, and General Cunningham shows that such is the case, allowance being made for the rough methods employed in calculating such distances in ancient times. Bunbury inclines to accept this identification, but thinks that as Opianê is in Stephanos the name of a country, the evidence of the modern appellation (Houpiân) is of little weight in determining the position of the city. No mention of this Alexandreia occurs either in Ptolemy or the _Periplûs of the Erythraian Sea_, but it is mentioned in the _Mahâvanso_ under the form Alasaddâ, or Alasandâ, as Hardy writes it. About the 7th century again of our aera, the Chinese pilgrim Hiouen Thsiang speaks of Houpiân (Hou-pi-na in Chinese transcription) as a large city in which the chief of the Vardaks resided. Its ruin may be dated from the aera of the Mohammedan conquest, for Baber in his Memoirs speaks of Houpiân as if it were merely the name of the Pass which opens on the valley of the Ghorbund. According to Hardy, Alasandâ was the birthplace of Menander (the Milinda of Sanskrit), the Graeco-Baktrian king. See Wilson’s _Ar. Antiq._ pp. 179-182; V. de Saint-Martin, _Étude_, 21-26; Cunningham’s _Anc. Geog. of India_, pp. 19-26; Bunbury’s _Hist. of Anc. Geog._ i. 490-492; Weber’s _Die Griechen in Indien_; and Hardy’s _Manual of Buddhism_, p. 516.

NOTE B.—NIKAIA

This is a Greek word meaning _victorious_, and may possibly be a translation of the indigenous name of the place. Wilson (_Ar. Antiq._ p. 183) takes this view, and fixes the site of Nikaia on the plain of Begrâm at a spot with ruins about some eighteen miles distant from Houpiân. The original name of the place may have been _Jayapura_, which means _the city of victory_. According to others, Nikaia is a transliteration of _Nichaia-gram_, a place said to be in Kafîristân—that is, in the upper part of the valleys which slope away from the Hindu-Kush and carry their waters to the Kâbul river on its left. A belief was at one time current that the Kafîrs of Bajour were descended from the Macedonians whom Alexander had left there when he passed through the country on his way to India. They had, it was said, many points of character in common with the Greeks. They were celebrated for their beauty and their European complexions. They worshipped idols, drank wine in silver cups or vases, used chairs and tables, and spoke a language unknown to their neighbours. Elphinstone during his Kâbul mission (in 1808) caused inquiries to be made as to the truth of these reports, which had greatly excited his curiosity. It was found that though they were in the main correct, yet the fact that the people had no certain traditions of their own as to their origin, while the languages spoken by the different tribes were all of them closely allied to Sanskrit, showed the theory of their Greek origin to be untenable. In the list which was furnished to the envoy of the names of their tribes and villages, Nisa is the only one in which any similarity to Nikaia can be traced. In Lassen’s opinion, Nikaia was not built on the site of any previously existing town, but was first founded by Alexander, who named it the _victorious_ in anticipation of the triumphs which awaited him in India. General Abbott identified it with Nangnihar, a place about four or five miles west of Jalâlâbâd, which he thought Curtius took to be the point where Alexander first entered Indian territory. General Cunningham again, like Ritter and Droysen, thinks that Nikaia must have been Kâbul, otherwise that important town, through which Alexander must have marched, would be passed over by his historians without mention. He cites in proof a passage from the _Dionysiakê_ of Nonnus, in which Nikaia is described as a stone city situated near a lake. The lake, he says, is a remarkable feature which is peculiar in Northern India to Kâbul and Kâshmîr. The authority of Nonnus, however, on such a point is of no worth whatever. Wilson’s view that Nikaia occupied the site of Bagrâm seems preferable to any other. It is the view also which Bunbury favours. (See his _History of Ancient Geography_, p. 439 _n._)

NOTE C.—ASPASIOI ASSAKÊNOI

The Aspasioi are the people called by Strabo, in his list of the tribes which occupied the country between the Kôphês and the Indus, the Hippasioi. They are easily to be recognised under either of these names as the Aśvaka who are mentioned in the _Mahâbhârata_ along with the Gândhâra as the barbarous inhabitants of far distant regions in the north. The name of the _Aśvaka_, derived from _aśva_, “a horse,” means cavaliers, and indicates that their country was renowned in primitive times, as it is at the present day, for its superior breed of horses. The fact that the Greeks translated their name into Hippasioi (from ἵππος, a horse) shows that they must have been aware of its etymological signification. V. de Saint-Martin inclines to think that the name of the Hippasioi is partly preserved in that of the Pachaï, a considerable tribe located in the upper regions of the Kôphês basin. It is more distinctly preserved in _Asip_ or _Isap_, the Pukhto name of this tribe, called by Mohammedans the _Yusufzai_. The name of the Assakênoi, like that of the Aspasioi, represents the Sanskrit Aśvaka, which in the popular dialect is changed into Assaka, and by the addition of the Persian plural termination into Assakan, a form which Arrian has all but exactly transcribed, and which appears without any change in the Assakanoi of Strabo and the Assacani of Curtius. They are now represented by the Aspîn of Chitral and the Yashkun of Gilgit. Some writers think, however, that the name of the Assakans or Asvakans is still extant in that of the Afghans, for the change of the sibilant into the rough aspirate is quite normal, and also that of _k_ into _g_, a mute of its own order. Dr. Bellew, however, in his _Inquiry into the Ethnography of Afghanistan_, finds the source of the name in the Armenian Aghván, and says it seems clear from what he has explained that the name Afghân merely means “mountaineer,” and is neither an ethnic term of distinct race nationality nor of earlier origin than the period of the Roman dominion in Asia Minor. See the _Inquiry_, pp. 196-208.

NOTE D.—MAZAGA

The name of this place, which in Sanskrit would appear as Mâśaka, has various forms in the classics—_Massaga_ as in our author here, _Massaka_ in his _Indika_, _Mazaga_ in Curtius, and _Masoga_ in Strabo, who says it was the capital of King Assakanos. The exact position of this important place has not yet been ascertained, but its name as that of an ancient site still remains in the country. The Emperor Baber states in his _Memoirs_ that at the distance of two rapid marches from the town of Bajore (the capital of the province of the same name), lying to the west of the river Pañjkoré, there was a town called Mashanagar on the river of Sévad (Swât). Rennell identified this name with the Massaga of Alexander’s historians, and no doubt correctly. M. Court, who has given interesting information about the country of the Yuzafzaïs, which he collected among the inhabitants of the plains, learned from them that at twenty-four miles from Bajore there exists a ruined site known under the double name of Maskhine and Massangar (Massanagar). In the grammar again of Pânini, who was a native of Gândhâra, in which the Assakan territory was comprised, the word Mâśakâvatî occurs, given as the name both of a river and a district. It may then fairly be presumed that Massaga was the capital of the Mâśakâvatî district, and that the impetuous stream which, as we learn from Curtius, ran between steep banks and made access to Massaga difficult on the east side, was the Mâśakâvatî of Pânini (_v._ Lassen, _Ind. Alt._ II. pp. 136-138; V. de Saint-Martin, _Étude_, pp. 35, 36; and Abbott, _Gradus ad Aornon_). Curtius (viii. 37, 38) describes with more minuteness than Arrian the nature of the engineering operations designed to make the attack against the walls practicable. He states that Assacanus, the king of the place, died before Alexander’s arrival, and not after the siege had begun, as Arrian relates. He adds that Assacanus was succeeded by his mother (wife?), whose name was Cleophis, and who, according to Justin, bore a son whose paternity was ascribed to Alexander. In reference to this statement Dr. Bellew remarks that at the present day several of the chiefs and ruling families in the neighbouring states of Chitral and Badakhshan boast a lineal descent from Alexander the Great.

NOTE E.—BAZIRA

Some writers have taken Bazira to be Bajore, which lies midway between the river of Kunâr and the Landaï, but there is nothing beyond the similarity of the two names to recommend this view. As the Bazirians fled for refuge to the rock Aornos, which overhung the Indus, it is evident they could not have inhabited a place so remote from the rock as Bajore. Cunningham finds a more likely position for Bazira at Bâzâr, “a large village situated on the _Kalpan_, or Kâli-pâni river, and quite close to the town of _Rustam_, which is built on a very extensive old mound.... According to tradition this was the site of the original town of Bâzâr. The position is an important one, as it stands just midway between the Swât and the Indus rivers, and has therefore been from time immemorial the _entrepôt_ of trade between the rich valley of Swât and the large towns on the Indus and Kâbul rivers.... This identification is much strengthened by the proximity of Mount _Dantalok_, which is most probably the same range of hills as the _Montes Daedali_ of the Greeks.” See his _Anc. Geog. of India_, pp. 65, 66.

NOTE F.—AORNOS

The identification of this celebrated rock has been one of the most perplexing problems of Indian archaeology. The descriptions given of it by the classical writers are more or less discrepant, and their indications as to its position very vague and obscure. It has thus been identified with various positions, against each of which objections of more or less weight may be urged, but the view of General Abbott, who has identified it with Mount Mahâban, has the balance of argument in its favour, and is now generally adopted. The rock, to judge from Arrian’s description of it, must have been in reality a mountain of very considerable height, with a summit of tableland crowned here and there with steep precipices. Curtius, on the other hand, says that the rock, which was on all sides steep and rugged, did not rise to its pinnacle in slopes of ordinary height and of easy ascent, but that in shape it resembled the conical pillar of the racecourse, called the _meta_, which springs from a broad basis and gradually tapers till it terminates in a sharp point. Here Arrian, who drew his facts from Ptolemy, a prominent actor in capturing Aornos, is, as usual, a safer guide than Curtius, who wrote for effect, and often dealt unscrupulously with the facts of history. Arrian, again, is at variance with Diodôros in his estimate both of the circuit and of the height of the rock, for while with him it has a circuit of 200 stadia (about 23 miles) and a height of 11, Diodôros reduces the circuit by one-half and increases the height to 16 stadia. Curtius is silent on these points, but he mentions a circumstance of great importance which Arrian has failed to note, namely, that the roots of the rock were washed by the river Indus. That he is right here cannot be questioned, for the statement is corroborated both by Diodôros and by Strabo (xv. 687), while Arrian, who says nothing that can lead us to think that his view was different, supplies us with a proof that Aornos was close to the Indus, for he says of the city of Embolima, which we now know to have been on the Indus, that it was situated close to Aornos. The position thus indicated is about sixty miles above Attak, where the Indus escapes into the plains from a long and narrow mountain gorge which the ancients mistook for its source. Colonel Abbott in 1854 explored this neighbourhood, and came to the conclusion that Mount Mahâban, a hill which abuts precipitously on the western bank of the Indus about eight miles west from the site of Embolima, was Aornos. His arguments in support of this identification are given in his _Gradus ad Aornon_. His description of Mount Mahâban agrees in the main with that which Arrian has given of Aornos. “The rock Aornos,” he says, “was the most remarkable feature of the country, as is the Mahâban. It was the refuge of all the neighbouring tribes. It was covered with forests. It had good soil sufficient for a thousand ploughs, and pure springs of water everywhere abounded. It was 4125 feet above the plain, and 14 miles in circuit. It was precipitous on the side of Embolima, yet not so steep but that 220 horse and the war-engines were taken to the summit. The summit was a plain where cavalry could act. It would be difficult to offer a more faithful description of the mount.” “Why the historians,” he adds, “should all call it the _rock_ Aornos, it would be difficult to say. The side on which Alexander scaled the main summit had certainly the character of a rock, but the whole description of Arrian indicates a table mountain.” Cunningham, in his _Ancient Geography of India_, advances some arguments against this identification, but they cannot be considered sufficiently cogent to warrant its rejection unless a better could be substituted. That which he proposes, however, is altogether untenable. What he suggests is that the hill-fortress of Râni-gat, situated immediately above the small village of Nogram, about sixteen miles north by west from Ohind, which he takes to be the site of Embolima, corresponds in all essential particulars, except in its elevation (under 1200 feet), with the description of Aornos as given by Arrian, Strabo, and Diodôros. Now if the elevation stated, which is some 6000 feet under what Arrian assigns to Aornos, was really the height of the rock, then the details of the operations by which it was captured are rendered partly unintelligible. Thus, why should Ptolemy, after ascending the rock to a certain distance, have kindled a fire to let Alexander, who remained at the base, know where he was? Can we not easily see with the naked eye from the foot to the top of a small hill only ten or eleven hundred feet high? Moreover, we are informed that it took Alexander from daybreak till noon to reach the position occupied by Ptolemy. Can it be supposed that all that space of time was required for the ascent of a hill not much higher than Arthur’s Seat, near Edinburgh? The highest mountain in Great Britain could be climbed in half the time. Another equally fatal objection to this theory is the distance of Râni-gat from the Indus. The roots of the rock were indubitably washed by that river, but Râni-gat is no less than sixteen miles distant from it. At the same time, if Râni-gat were Aornos, then Ohind cannot be Embolima, for Arrian says that Embolima was close to (ξύνεγγυς) Aornos. The identification of the rock with Raja Hodi’s fort opposite Attak, first suggested by General Court and afterwards supported by the learned missionary Loewenthal, has in its favour the fact that the position is on the Indus, but it is otherwise untenable. It is uncertain whether the name Aornos is purely Greek or an attempt at the transliteration of the indigenous name. If purely Greek, then Dionysios Perieg. (l. 1150) is right in saying that men called the rock Aornis because even swift-winged birds had difficulty in flying over it. If indigenous, the name may be referred to _Aranai_, which, as Dr. Bellew states, is a common Hindi name for hill ridges in these parts. He identifies the rock as _Shàh Dum_ or _Malka_, on the heights of Mahâban, the stronghold of the Wahabi fanatics, at the destruction of which he was present in 1864. See his _Inquiry_, p. 68.

NOTE G.—NYSA

Arrian’s narrative indicates neither in what part of the Kôphên and Indus Dôâb Nysa was situated, nor at what time Alexander made his expedition to the place. But we learn from Curtius (viii. 10), Strabo (xv. 697), and Justin (xii. 7) that he was there before he had as yet crossed the Choaspes and taken Massaga, and Arrian says nothing from which it can be inferred that his opinion was different. Nysa was therefore most probably the city which Ptolemy calls Nagara or Dionysopolis, and which has been identified with Nanghenhar (the Nagarahâra of Sanskrit), an ancient capital, the ruins of which have been traced at a distance of four or five miles west from Jalâlâbâd. This place was called also Udyânapura, _i.e._ “the city of gardens,” which the Greeks from some resemblance in the sound translated into Dionysopolis, a compound meaning “the city of Dionysos.” At some distance eastward from this site, but on the opposite bank of the river, there is a mountain called Mar-Koh (_i.e._ snake-hill) which, if Nysa be Nagara, may be regarded as the Mount Meros which lay near it, and was ascended by Alexander. It has, however, been assumed that, in Arrian’s opinion, the expedition to Nysa was not an early incident of the campaign in the Dôâb, but the last of any importance after the capture of Aornos. The only ground for this assumption is that his account of the expedition to Nysa follows that of all the other transactions recorded to have occurred west of the Indus. But the reason of this is not far to seek. Arrian, on examining the accounts given by different writers of the visit to Nysa and Meros, concluded that they were for the most part apocryphal, and as he did not wish to mix up romance with history, reserved the subject for separate treatment. Abbott, who took it for granted that Arrian wished it to be understood that Alexander visited Nysa after the capture of the rock, looked for the site of that city nearer the Indus than the plain of Jalâlâbâd; and found one to suit the requirements in the neighbourhood of Mount Elum, called otherwise Râm Takht or “the throne of Râm.” This remarkable mountain, he says, rises like some mighty pagoda to the height of nine or ten thousand feet, and answers in many points to the descriptions given of Meros, being densely covered with forests, full of wild beasts and of a height at which, in that part of India, ivy, box, etc., flourish. At its roots are the following old towns with names all derivable from Bacchos: Lusa (Nysa), Lyocah (Lyaeus), Elye, Awân, Bimeeter (Bimêtêr), Bôkra (Bou-Kera), and Kerauna (Keraunos). Beneath the town of Lusa flows the river Burindu, which is occasionally unfordable during the spring. Abbott makes this remark about the river with reference to the statement in Plutarch that when Alexander sat down before Nysa, the Macedonians had some difficulty of advancing to the attack on account of the depth of the river that washed its walls. V. de Saint-Martin and Dr. Bellew identify Nysa with Nysatta, a village near the northern bank of the Kâbul river about six miles below Hashtnagar, but except some correspondence between the names, there seems little to recommend this view. Strabo has one or two passages concerning Nysa. “In Sophoclês,” he says, “a person is introduced speaking the praises of Nysa, as a mountain sacred to Bacchos: ‘Whence I beheld the famed Nysa, the resort of the Bacchanalian bands, which the horned Iacchos makes his most pleasant and beloved retreat, where no bird’s clang is heard.’ From such stories they gave the name Nysaians to some imaginary nation, and called their city Nysa, founded by Bacchos; a mountain above the city they called Mêros, alleging as a reason for imposing these names that the ivy and vine grow there, although the latter does not perfect its fruit, for the bunches of grapes drop off before maturity in consequence of excessive rains” (xv. 687). In a subsequent passage (697) he says: “After the river Kôphês follows the Indus. The country lying between these two rivers is occupied by the Astakênoi, Masianoi, Nysaioi, and the Hippasioi. Next is the territory of Assakanos, where is the city Masoga.” Pliny also has one or two notices of Nysa. “Most writers,” he says (_H. N._ vi. 21), “assume that the city Nysa and also the mountain Merus, consecrated to the god Bacchus, belong to India. This is the mountain whence arose the fable that Bacchus issued from the thigh (μηρός) of Jupiter. They also assign to India the country of the Aspagani so plentiful in vines, laurel, and box, and all kinds of fruitful trees that grow in Greece.” In Book viii. 141, he says “that on Nysa, a mountain in India, there are lizards 24 feet in length, and in colour yellow or purple or blue.”

The legend that Dionysos was bred in the thigh of Zeus owes its origin to a figurative mode of expression, common among the Phoenicians and Hebrews, which was taken by the Greeks in a literal sense. See the Epistle to the Hebrews, vii. 10. The Kafîrs who now occupy the country through which Alexander first marched on his way from the Kaukasos to the Indus, are said by Elphinstone to drink wine to great excess, men and women alike. “They dance,” he adds, “with great vehemence, using many gesticulations, and beating the ground with great force, to a music which is generally quick, but varied and wild. Such usages would certainly have struck the Macedonians as Bacchanalian.” So certainly would such a spectacle as the following, described by Bishop Heber in his _Indian Journal_: “The two brothers Rama and Luchman, in a splendid palkee, were conducting the retreat of their army. The divine Hunimân, as naked and almost as hairy as the animal he represented, was gamboling before them, with a long tail tied round his waist, a mask to represent the head of a baboon, and two great pointed clubs in his hands. His army followed, a number of men with similar tails and masks, their bodies dyed with indigo, and also armed with clubs. I was never so forcibly struck with the identity of Rama and Bacchus. Here were before me Bacchus, his brother Ampelus, the Satyrs, smeared with wine-lees, and the great Pan commanding them.” I may, in conclusion, subjoin a notice of Bacchos in India from Polyainos: “Dionysos marching against the Indians in order that the Indians might receive him did not equip his troops with armour that could be seen, but with soft raiment and fawn skins. The spears were wrapped round with ivy, and the thyrsus had a sharp point. In making signals he used cymbals and drums instead of the trumpet, and, by warming the enemy with wine, he turned them (from war) to dancing. These and all other Bacchic orgies were the stratagems of war by which Bacchos subjugated the Indians and all the rest of Asia. Dionysos, when in India, seeing that his army could not endure the burning heat, seized the three-peaked mountain of India. Of its peaks one is called Korasibiê, another Kondaskê, but the third he himself named Mêros in commemoration of his birth. Upon it were many fountains of water sweet of taste, abundance of game and fruit, and snows, which gave new vigour to the frame. The troops quartered there would take the barbarians of the plains by surprise, and put them to an easy rout by attacking them with missiles from their commanding position on the heights above. Dionysos having conquered the Indians, invaded Baktria, taking with him as auxiliaries the Indians themselves and the Amazons.”

NOTE H.—GOLD-DIGGING ANTS